RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Hillary in 2008

I actually agree that Rumsfeld should be replaced with someone who would be less controversial and restore confidence in how the Iraq and Afghan wars are conducted. A good choice would be former Defense Secretary Perry, who under Clinton was well received by both Republicans and Democrats alike.



What annoys me about Hilary Clinton's remarks, and confrontation with Rumsfeld in hearings this week, is that she doesn't offer any alternative, and just complains that what's being done isn't working.

And note that Hilary Clinton, who previously was more Hawkish and supportive of the war, has now turned anti-war like her fellow Democrats, and begun lashing out at the Bush administration about the war.
If Sen. Clinton's posturing was a principled stand with a specific alternative policy, I would view her actions as productive and in the interest of the country. But instead she's just whining, and offering no solutions, like the rest of her party.

Hilary's actions are based on political expediency, not principle.

She's seen how support of the war has put Sen Joseph Lieberman's re-election in serious jeapordy.
And so she's setting aside the best interest of the nation, and taking up the mantle of the Angry anti-American Left, and begun mouthing liberal rhetoric that bemoans failure, but offers no alternatives, in order to suck up to her Democrat voter-base, and remain a potential nominee for the 2008 presidential election.

Just like Kerry before her, I might add. Who took on Howard Dean's angry rhetoric, to steal Dean's thunder and get the 2004 nomination. We all know how well that served Kerry.

Democrats are good at telling people what they want to hear, and then abandoning their convictions later, as soon as the political wind shifts.
And Hilary Clinton is no exception. Her liberal colors, which she's tried for 6 years to mask, are once again on display.